Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1987 (10) TMI 306 - AT - Customs

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal reduces redemption fine and penalty, adjusts assessable value in import dispute. The appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal, which reduced the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellants. The Tribunal revised the ...
                      Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                          Tribunal reduces redemption fine and penalty, adjusts assessable value in import dispute.

                          The appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal, which reduced the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the appellants. The Tribunal revised the assessable value of the imported goods, finding a middle ground between the Customs authorities' valuation and the appellants' declaration. The decision considered the evidence and arguments presented, resulting in a balanced outcome that adjusted the penalties and assessed value of the goods.




                          Issues Involved:
                          1. Misdeclaration of goods.
                          2. Under-valuation of imported goods.
                          3. Unauthorised importation.
                          4. Imposition of redemption fine and penalty.
                          5. Determination of assessable value of goods.

                          Detailed Analysis:

                          1. Misdeclaration of Goods:
                          The Customs authorities suspected that the imported goods were misdeclared. The appellants described the goods as "Zip Fastners" and not as "Polyester Zippers," which the Customs authorities alleged was a misdeclaration. The appellants argued that the non-addition of trade nomenclature did not amount to misdeclaration. The Tribunal found no document to show that the imported goods were Nylon Zippers, as alleged by the Customs, and thus did not attach importance to the findings of the Collector regarding misdeclaration.

                          2. Under-valuation of Imported Goods:
                          The Customs authorities alleged that the imported goods were undervalued. The appellants claimed that the goods were rejected stock and dead stock, which justified the low price. They provided evidence that the goods had been shipped from Japan to Singapore and back, causing deterioration. The Tribunal noted that the price list and the invoice price in respect of Suhag Traders could not be relied on in toto nor rejected completely. The Tribunal concluded that the value of the goods should be somewhere between what the department found and what the appellants pleaded.

                          3. Unauthorised Importation:
                          The Customs authorities held that there was unauthorised importation. The appellants argued that the transaction was genuine and that the goods were purchased at a negotiated price. The Tribunal found that the manner in which the goods were purchased without correspondence, offer, negotiations, and documentation did not inspire complete confidence in the total bona fides of the transaction.

                          4. Imposition of Redemption Fine and Penalty:
                          The Collector imposed a redemption fine and a penalty on the appellants. The Tribunal ordered that the redemption fine imposed be reduced to Rs. 75,000 and the penalty be reduced to Rs. 25,000, considering the circumstances of the case.

                          5. Determination of Assessable Value of Goods:
                          The Customs authorities valued the goods at Rs. 3,34,735, while the appellants declared the value as Rs. 1,28,035. The Tribunal, after considering the evidence and arguments, decided that the value of the goods for purposes of assessment and ITC should be Rs. 2,23,147. The Tribunal noted that the appellants produced licenses for goods worth Rs. 1,28,033, leaving goods valued at Rs. 95,114 as uncovered by licenses. Customs duty was to be charged on the value ordered by the Tribunal.

                          Conclusion:
                          The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal reducing the redemption fine and penalty and revising the assessable value of the imported goods. The Tribunal's decision balanced the evidence and arguments presented by both sides, arriving at a fair conclusion regarding the value and penalties.
                          Full Summary is available for active users!
                          Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                          Topics

                          ActsIncome Tax
                          No Records Found